ML20058K892
| ML20058K892 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 05/31/1973 |
| From: | Musolf D NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058K891 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9104250473 | |
| Download: ML20058K892 (48) | |
Text
--
a . r ,
NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY MONTICELLO NUCIEAR GENERATING PIANT l
REPORT TO THE UNITED STATES A'IOMIC ENERGY COMESCION DIRECTORATE OF LICENS1AG t LICENSE NO. DPR-22 l REACTOR CONTAINMENT BUILDING INTEGRATED LEAK TEST FAY 1973 Type B & C Tests Conducted by: Report Prepared by:
W E Bdge D M Masolf G D Kaas C H McGilton Type A Test Conducted by: -
C H McGilton D M Musolf 9104250473 730903 63 CF ADOCK 050
. c ,
TAELE OF CONTENTS M
- 1. Introctuction 1.1 1 Purpose of Containment Leakage hsts 1 1.2 Testing Requirements 1.2.1 1 Frequency of Testing 1 1.2.2 Test Acceptance Criteria 2 1.2 3 Required Procedure for Icakage Testing 2
- 2. Test Results 2.1 2 Type B and Type C Test Fesults 2 2.2 Type A Test Results 3
3 Description of Test Procedures 31 3 Type B and Type C Test Procedure 3.2 77pe A Test Procedure 3 4
3 2.1 Type A Test Instruments and Equipment 4 3 2.2 Type A Test Summary of Events 5
- 4. Summary of Test Calculations h.1 7 Type B and Type C Test Calculations 7 h.2 Type A Test Calculations 3 4.3 Ca]culations for Verification of Type A Test Accuracy 10 5 Error Analysis 5.1 11 Type B and Type C Test Error Analysis 11 5 1.1 Type B and Type C Test Error Analysis Assumptions 11 !
5.1.2 Calculation of Estimated Type B and Type C Test Error 11 j 5.2 j
Type A Test Error Analysis 5.2.1 Assumptions for Type A Error Analysis 13 j 5 2.2 13 Derivation of Type A Test Error Belation
- 5.2 3 Estirated Variance of Fach Type A Test 13
)
i 15 Measurement ;
! 5.2.4 Estimate of Type A hst Error l i
5.2 5 Estimate of 'Pype A hst Verification Error 17 17 '
s APPENDIX A Type B and Type C Test Data snd Rasults
. 26
{ APPENDIX B Summary Feport of All Type C I
.- 34 j Tests Failing to Meet the Icakage '
Acceptance Criteria o
APPENDIX C Type A Test Data and Calculations 40 I i
APPENDIX D Type A Test Verification Ihta and 1
Calculations 45 1
v , , --- -.-v-- .,- - - , , , , , , .,
i a
- r i
t j 1 l 1. Introduction l
1.1 Purpose of Containment Leakane Tests t
As stated in 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, primary containment leakage 1 _ tests are conducted to assure that:
l .
a) Leakage through the primary reactor containment and systems and components penetratlng primary containment shall not l exceed allowable leakage rate values as specified in the ;
Technical Specifications or associated Bases.
b) Periodic surveillance of reactor containment penetrations and isolation valves is performed so that proper maintenance and repairs are made during the service life of the containment, and systers and components penetrating primary containment.
Results of containment leakage tests are reported to the Directorate of Licensing, USAEC, following each periodic containment integrated
- leakage test (Type A test). This report must include
a) Analysis and interpretation of the Type A test results.
l b) Summary analysis of containment penetration local leakage tests (Type B tests) and containment isolation valve local Icakage tests (Type C tests) conducted sinc 2 the last Type A test.
c) Separate accompanying summary report of Types A, B, and C tests
] which failed the acceptance criteria.
1.2 Testing Requirements i
1.2.1 Frecuency of Testing 1
Type A tests are scheduled in accordance with Paragraph 4.7.a.2 (d) of the Monticello Technical Specifications. Testing is required at the following intervals:
i 1
a) During the first refueling outage.
b) Within 24 months of the test in (1) above.
c) Within 48 months of the test in (2) above and every 48 months i
thereafter.
In the event that any testing (local or integrated) yields a leak rate in excess of L t=1.2 weight percent of the contained air per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> at the test pressure P =41 psig, the condition must ha corrected and the testing schedule reverts to:
s s
a) At the first refueling outage following the retest made (local or integrated) to correct the excess leakage.
b) Within 24 months of the test in (1) above.
c) Within 48 months of the test in (2) above and every 48 months thereafter.
Type B and Type C tests are scheduled in accordance with I Paragraph 4.7. A.2 (e) of the Monticello Technical Specifications.
Testing is required each operating cycle.
1.2.2 Test Acceptance Criteria The acceptance criteria'for Type A teats is contained in Paragraph 4.7.A.2 (b) (2) of the Monticello-Technical Specifications. The allowable operational leak rate, L to' is 0.9 weight percent of the contained air per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> at P
- 41 psig. The containment leak rate, either as measured t or following repairs and retesting, must be less than L prior to resumption of power operation. to The acceptance criteria for Type B and Type C tests are contained in Paragraph 4.7.A.2 (f). The allowable laakage re'es are:
a) Double-gasketed seals total leakage 34.4 @ 41 scfh psig (10% Lto) b) Testable penetrations and isolation values 103.2 scfh total (30% Lto) except main steam 17.2 sefh each ( 5% Leo)
@ 41 psig isolation valves L
c) Main Steam isolation 11.5 scfh each
[ valves @ 25 psig
, 1,2.3 Required Procedare for Leakage Testing 1
l All containment leakage tests were conducted in accordance with
- i 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, and American National Standard ANSI N45.4-1972, " Leakage-Rate Testing of Lantainment Structures for Nuclear
- Reactors."
- f. 2. Test Results i
!- 2.1 Type B and Tvoe C Test Results i
i During March and April,1973, local leak rate tests were conducted on j all testable penetrations,'gasketed seals, doors, and isolation valves.
i i
ve..- y e ~ , , . --m- e .ww.~e-vy. .m.-,,,-.~w. ,.~,-e .iwer,,e,-,+ -.---+-~r.+w.w.,,
, ,r.we w- , - , . ,e v-a.,w,..-w=w r. --*
- i 4
i o !
l i
} .
i i
- Repairs and retests were made as necessary. Results of all '
i 2
tests are tabulated in Appendix A and summarized in Table 1. ;
1 s A separate summary report of all Type C tests which failed to j ,
meet the leakage acceptance criteria of the Technical Specifications l l
and a discussion of the recairs accomplished is included in Appendix B. ;
' All isolation valves wirb makage in excess of the individual valve leakage limit were rest. .' i.o acceptable leak tightness. Total ,
- leakage for double-gaskeLa seals and total leakage for all other !
{ penetrations and isolation valves following repairs satisfied the j Technical Specification limits. {
)
j 2.2 Type A Test Results l
/ ,
i The containment integrated leakage rate test.was conducted over the i
! period May 3 to May 7, 1973. The resulting measured leakage was j 0.640610.0050 wt%/ day. This leakage is well within the Technical j Specification limit of 0.9 wt%/ day. A detailed tabulation of all i data and leak rate calculations is presented in Appendix C. Data and leak rate calculations for the supplemental verification test i
! employed to demonstrate the validity of the integrated leakage rate i l test are included in Appendix D.
i {
i, 3. Description of Test Procedures i
j 3.1 Type B and Type C Test Procedure i
j All local leak rate tests were conducted using the pressuz : decay method. The volume between redundant isolation valves, the center j
of double-gasketed seals, or the volume of an expansion bellows, i electrical penetration, or hot' fluid piping penetration was j pressurized slightly above test pressure. Conditions were allowed to stabilize and the_ pressure decay was measured over an -
g j
interval using a certified pressure gauge. The decay rate at P t was obtained by interpolation of the test data and used in conjunction j~ with the known test volume to calculate the leakage rate. Temperature
' corrections were not made b'ecause of the difficulty of positioning a temperature sensor in the. test volume. In addition, it will be demonstrated in the error analysir that these corrections would be j
+
small compared to other uncertainties-in the testing procedure.
i j
- Isolation valves were tested either singly or several in the same j
' line were tested simultaneously depending upon the location of installed test connections., in the event that the single valve - l 1eakage limit specification was not met during a multiple valve '
q test, all valves involved were individually leakage tested to 1
isolate the component needing repair.
l i
L
.i
'~,-- _
l t
d Nitrogen was used to test all electrical penetrations and for testing other penetrations where convenient. Results from leakage tests conducted using nitrogen were corrected to equivalent air le akage rates.
3.2 Type A Test Procedure 3.2.1 Type A Test Instruments and Equipment The integrated containment leakage rate test was conducted using
- the reference-vessel method specified in ANSI N-45.4-1972. The principal measuring instruments consisted of a reference chamber system, a 36-inch U-tube manometer, a 0-50 psig Heise gauge, 20 copper-constantan thermocouples, and four Foxboro Type 2701 RG d ewc els .
The reference chamber (Figure 1) consisted of three sections sized in proportion to the containment volume represented by each. All sections were fabricated from 2-inch thin-wall copper pipe connected by 1/4 inch copper tubing. Prior to the integrated leakage test the reference system was evacuated and filled with dry nitrogen. The reference system and all instrument piping was then subjected to a 48-hour leak test at 50 psig using the absolute method specified in ANSI N-45.4-1972. The reference syster leak test was also conducted at the I
conclusion of the integrated leakage rate test. In both instances, the reference system was verified to have essentially zero leakage.
i The U-tube manometer (Figure 2) was used to measure reference chamber-containment differential pressure. Pressare gauge FI-l was used to insure that reference chamber pressure was higher than containment pressure when the manometer was placed in service. Valves E, F, and G were opened first to permit a small amount of dry nitrogen to flow from the reference system into containment thereby equalizing pressures. This procedure prevents the it.troduction of noisture into the reference system.
i Closing valve E then places the manometer between reference system and containment atmospheres. Valve E is leak tested as part of the initial 48-hour reference system leakage test.
The Heise gauge, PI-2, was used to indicate containment pressure.
This gauge was certified by comparison with an absolute mercury manometer prior to the integrated containment leakage test.
Copper-constantan thermocouples were placed throughout the containment to monitor temperature. Each thermocouple was assigneo a weighting factor proportional to the volume monitored for use in calculating the average containment temperature.
Tables 2 and 3 list the thermocouple locations and assigt.ed weighting factors. The thermocouple signals were transmitted to the plant process computer where all temperatures were printed by the computer typer in degrees F. The computer reference junction circuits were calibrated prior to the integrated leakage
- test by comparing thermocouple readings to certified mercury thermometer readings.
Dewcels were used to monitor containment vapor pressure. Each dewes1 was assigned a weighting factor proportional to the containment volume monitored for calculation of average vapor pressure. Tables 2 and 3 list the deweel locations and assigned weighting factors. The dewcel signals were transmitted to the plant process computer and all vapor pressures were printed directly in inches of water by the computer typer. Reading of the dewcel resistance and conversion to vapor pressure were accomplished by entering the required calibration curves into the computer memory.
Calibration was checked using a certified resistance decade box to simulate each dewcel RTD.
A rotameter was connected to the test connection on the drywell flood switch lower sensing line as shown in Figure 1. This rotameter and its associated throttle valve, R, were used to regulate the controlled bleed rate during the verification phase of the containment integrated leakage rate test.
Additional data on the integrated leakage rate test instruments are summarized in Table 4.
The containment was pressurized using two 600-cfm portable diesel air compressors (Figure 3). The air was cooled and dried using a portable f'lter and chiller-dryer unit and supplied to the drywell through a flange connection on the nitrogen purge system.
Normal containment ventilation fans could not be operated during the test because they were not designed for 41-psig operation.
Six portable 10,000-ofm electric fans equipped with oversized motors were located at points listed in Table 5 to promote mixing of the air.
i
, 3.2.2 Type A Test Summary of Events The pre-test containment inspection was completed on May 2 with no visible structural deterioration found. Major preliminary steps were begun immediately and included:
t l
a) Installation of portable electric fans in the containment.
i i
. b) Final check-out of temperature and humidity instruments. ;
i c) Completion of pre-test reference system leakage measurement. l d) Replacement of all manway covers followed by Type B tests.
e) Blocking of all vacuum breakers in the open position.
f) Valving out of all drywell pressure switches. l g) Jumpering of all reactor water LOW 1evel switches.
i h) Draining of the reactor vessel below steam and feedwater !
nozzles.
fi
- 1) Draining of steam and feedwater lines. l l
j) Venting of reactor vessel to containment atmosphere. !
l k) Comp rrisa of valve lineup sheets.
On May 3 at 1630, the drywell airlock was shut and tested for leakage. The portable air compressors were started and pressurication of containment was begun at 4 psi /hr. At 9230 on May 4, the compressors were shut down at an indi:ated drywell pressure of 42.2 psig. Logging of containment parameters commenced at 0600 and conditions were determined to be sufficiently stable for meaningful and consistent data by 1800.
Data was logged hourly and a point-to-point calculation of leakage rate was plotted to detect possible spurious readings. At 0100 on May 6, 31 hours3.587963e-4 days <br />0.00861 hours <br />5.125661e-5 weeks <br />1.17955e-5 months <br /> of usable data had been accumulated and the ,
integrated containment leakage rate test was considered completed. 1 i
The controlled bleed verification of the test accuracy was. begun !
at 0200, but initial measurements did not yield the expected i
. leakage rate. After an investigation of all possible sources of
' error, it was discovered that the location of throttle valve R(Figure 1) l had an important influence on the rotameter used to monitor the
. controlled bleed flow. The throttle valve was initially installed
, upstream of the rotameter. This was found to be contrary to the recommendations of the rotameter manufacturer, and the valve was relocated to the discharge side of the instrument. At 0200 on May 7, the controlled bleed verification test was begun once again i
e
and satisfactory data was obtained. At 0800, sufficient data had been collected to verify the accuracy of the
, integrated leakage rate test within allowable statistical error.
l .
The containment was depressurized through the drywell and l torus 2-inch vent lines to the Standby Gas Treatment System.
.* At 2000 on May 7, depressurization was completed and the containment was inspected. No damage was discovered.
l 4. Summary of Test Calculations I
4.1 Type B and Type C Calculations The following equation was used to calculate leakage rate using the pressure decay method:
L = 4.082 V p L = leakage rate (scfh)
V = vo: me of measuring apparatus +
vo.ume of test region (f t 3) p = measured pressure decay rate at the test pressure (psi / min)
If nitrogen was used in the test, the calculated leakage rate was corrected by multiplying by 1.037.
This equation is derived directly from the ideal gas relation:
pV = m R T M
p = pressure of test gas M = molecular weight of test gas Ru = Universal: gas constant 5
m = mass of gas in test region T = absolute gas temperature Therefore: m = pVM/RuT dm = VM d2 assume E = 0 dt RT y dt at L(M.T,p) = RuT dm Mp dt L(scfh air) = 530 Mgas 1 60 min Vp T Mair 14.7 hr
l
- i I
J l
If the test gas is air:
i L(sefh air) = 60 Vp = 4.082 V p ,
14.7 l assuming 530/T
- 1 If the test gas is nitrogen: I L(scfh air) = MN2 4.082 V p wherePh2 = 1.037 Mair Mair Data and calculations for all Type B and Type C tests are tabulated in Appendix A.
4.2 Type A Calculations Each hour during the integrated containment leakage test and the accuracy verification test, the following calculations were made i to determine the point-to-point method leak rate: l l
a) Containment Absolute Pressure l CONTAINFENT PRESSURE (psia) = PA502 + Ppg _2 PA502 = Computer Barometric Pressure (psia)
P PI-2
= rywe 1 else auge ressure (psig)
CONTAINMENT PRESSURE (inches water) = 27.67 x Q0NTAINMENT PRESSURE (psia) l
. b) Containment Average Temperature i
. WEIGHTED AVERAGE CONTAINMENT TEMP (CR) = ;
i= 1 wt it + 459.72 v1 = weiF hting factor for thermocouple 1 (Tablev 2 & 3) t g = Computer reading (OF) of thermocouple i
-9 c) Conta'.nment Average Vapor Pressure WEIGHTED AVERAGE CONTAINMENT VAPOR PRESSURE (inches water) =
< i i=4 l
-* i=1 "vi Pvi I wg = weighting factor for dewcel i (Tables 2 & 3) pyg = Computer reading (inches water) for dewcel i d) Containment - Reference Chamber op CONTAINMENT-REF CHAMB DIFF PRES (inches water) =
l LRL - LLL 1
LRL = Right le; level (inches) of DPI-l l Ltt = Left leg level (inches) of DPI-1 e) Leak Rate Calculation CONTAINMENT LEAKAGE RATE (WT%/24-HR) =
l 2400 Ty( A P 2+Pv2) APy+Pyy
.T2 (P1-Pyy) , p1_pv1 )
l l
Ty= Average absolute containment temperature at start of interval ( F) i T2 = Average absolute containment temperature at end of interval (OR)
~
aP y= Contait. ment-ref chamb dp at start of interval l (inches water) ;
aP2 = Containment-ref chamb dp at end of interval (inches water)
P yy = Containment vapor pressure at start of interval (inches water)
Pv2 = Containment vapor pressure at end of interval (inches water) .
/
i
_ - . , _ . , - r, , .
l b
P = Absolute containment pressure at start of interval (inches water) h = Length of interval (hours) i i i
~
I Derivation of the leakage rate equation may be found in ANSI i N-45.4-1972, Appendix B. '
l The purpose of the hourly calculations was to construct a plot ;
of point-to-point leakage rate (Figure C-1). This plot was 4 useful in detecting trends or possible anomalies. The actual containment leakage rate, however, was taken as the average of l data comparisons from eight 24-hour intervals. The first eight j hours of data following stabilization of the containment atmosphere i and the last eight hours of data were used for this purpose. All dats and calculations for the integrated containment leak rate test are tabulated in Appendix C.
4.3 Calculations for Verification of Type A Test Accuraev Six hours of useful data were taken with a controlled leakage rate '
established in addition to the normal containment leakage rate. The integrated leakage rate test validity was established by comparing L y ' and L y, where:
L'=L y c - L, Ly= Measureiintegrated leakage rate (wt%/ day)
L e = Leakage measured during controlled bleed (wt%/ day)
L, = Controlled bleed rate (wt%/ day)
Reasonable agreement between Ly 'and L is sufficient to verify the required test sensitivity since L, is made approximately equal to Ly .
- tottle valve R (Figure 1) was adjusted for approximately 0.6 wt%/ day
. through the controlled bleed rotameter. Rotameter indication and actual bleed rate were related in the following manner:
L (wt%/dayT =FS cf 14.7 1440 min 100%
P day i
V c c F = (Rotameter indicated flowrate) = 2.15 sefm
= 1.94 i S'={Rotameterscalefactorcorrection~
C for air metered at P with 14.7 c
ysia scale
, P C
=
Average containment absolute pressure = 55.65 psia
_during controlled biced ,
V =
Containment free air volume during = 258,430 ft 3 testing ,
, Drywell free volume 134,200 ft 3
. Torus free volume 105.450 l Vent pipe free volume 14,580 l .- Vessel internal volume to -25 inches 3,315 Steam and feed line free volume 885 up to inboard check or stop valves 258,430 ft3 .
Data and calculations for the verification phase of the integrated leak rate test are tabulated in Appendix D.
- 5. Error Analysis 5.1 Type B and Type C Test Error Analysis 5.1.1 Type B and Type C Test Error Analysis Assumptions a) All instrument errors are random.
b) All instrument readings are mutually independent.
5.1.2 Calculation of Estimated Type B and Type C Test Error Given the assumptions of 5.1.1, all measurements entering the local leakage rate calculations are independent random variables.
An estimate of the error in the calculation can be obtained as a function of the variance in the individual measurements.
The local leak rate formula is:
L = 4.082 V p The variance becomes:
02 (t) , at)2 0 (y) 2
+ 4 t j2 g2(p)
\ aV/ \ap/
2
. = 4.0822 _p g2(y) + y 2 g2(p)}
Test volumes were determined by physical measurement or from isometric drawings of plant piping. Estimated maximum error in the volume determination is 1%. Test pressures were determined using a Helicoid 0-60 psig gauge or equivalent with
h
. a certified accuracy of 0.25% of full scale. Decay rate, p, was determined in general from a linear approximation using two pressure measurements made at 10-minute intervals.
Assuming that maximum error is equal to twice the standard deviation of each measurement gives
.. 02 (v) = 0.01V = 2.5x10-Sy2 2
p = 1/10(PO- P 10 = x ()= x04 IO.002M M0J l 2 4 02 (L) = 4.082 2(2.5x10-5 py2 2 + 1.13x10 4V2, i
6 (L) = k.082 2 5x10-5L2 + 1.13x10-kV2 1
1 The largest leakage rate measured in Type B tests was 1.9 scfh and the largest test volume (exclading the airlock) was 2.32 f t 3, A conservative estimate of the Type B test error becomes:
j O' (L) = 4.032 f2 5x10-5(19)2 + 1.13x10-4(2 32)2 1
= 0.108 sefh
~ ~
TYPE B TEST 95% CONFIDENCE = L i 2 U(L) l _ INTERVAL _
l = L i 0.22 scfh The largest acceptable leakage rate in Type C tests is 17.2 scfm.
The mean test volume used was approximately 103ft . A typical Type C test will therefore have the following error l
O' (L) = 4.082 f 2 5x10-5(17 2)2 + 1.13x10-4 (10 )2
=
0 558 sefh
~
' TYPE C TEST 95% CONFIDENCE = L i 2 G(L)
_lNTERVAL _
= L i 1.1 scfh
, In developing the leakage relation for the pressure decay method, it was assumed:
dT/dt = 0 and 530/T = 1 The first assumption does not lead to appreciable error except in cases of gross leakage or extremely large insulated test volumes. The second assumption is valid since all tests were conducted inside the reactor building where ambient temperature does not vary more than 7Qt100F.
Error from neglecting this temperature variation is:
%Errorin , 10 (100%) ,y'9$
-Assuming 530/T=1 _
530 This source of error is much less than the uncertainties arising from pressure and volume measurements.
5.2 Type A Test Error Analvsis j 5.2.1 Assumptions for Type A Test Error Analysis a
a) All instrument errors are random.
1 b) All instrument readings are independent of other readings.
- c) The reference chamber exhibited zero leakage during the test.
I j 5.2.2 Derivation of Type A Test Error Relation Given the assumptions of 5.2.1, all test measurements entering the leak rate calculation are independent random variables.
An estimate of the error in the leak rate calculation can be 4
obtained as a function of the variances of the individual measurements.
a The leak rate formula is:
~
L = 2400 -Ty (AP 2+PV2) OE1+PVI h r2( P1-Pyy) P i-Pyy ,
i
_14 The variance becomes:
62 (L) = L U (T1 ) at[6(T) 2 2
+(ST/
+ L f U2 (,pl y , ggyg2(p2)
Py/ W/
. 2
+ gt 2 SLfg2(p1)+(dP v g (pv2) spy 1 v2
+ t SL 6 (Py) JL M(h)
\ dP y + (dh Make the following assumptions and definitions:
02 (T3 ) = 02 (T2 ) = 0 (T) 02 (p ) . g2(p)
U2 (Pyy) = 02 (pv2) = 0 (Py )
02 (apl) = 02(ap2 ) = 0 2(6p) h = 24 02 (h) = 0
~
T1"I2=7 verage absolute containment temperature during the test Py1 = Pv2 " Ev Average absolute containment vapor
~ pressure during the test ~
P1 >> Py1 The partial derivatives are:
7 3L = 3L =
)
100 (AP2+
3Ti GT 2 3L = L 3P y P1 SL = SL = 100 9P yy spy 2 P 1
aL =
at = 100 3AP y W2 Py
l l
l Making the following additional definitions:
Py wP g 4[Initialcontainmentabsolutepressure
=
~ APftaE
' 2 ' Average U-tube differential pressure ~
during the test period following the
,. first 24 hot- s ,
__ a ~
L tLN= Average containment leak rate determined from N individual 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> interval
, calculations .
I The variance becomes:
2 2 0 (L) = 20 (T)[ 100 (oF 2 + P y ) ] + 62(P)(IIN/Po)2 PET 2
+ 20 (aP)(100/Pg )2 + 202 (Py )(100/Pc 9 I
l l
The 95% confidence interval for a single 24-hour data I comparison becomes:
L i 27(L)
And the 95% confidence interval for the average of N !
24-hour dr?a comparisons becomes: !
_.Lgi 26 (L) f5 5.2.3 Estimated Variance of Each Type A Test Meas.rement i Estimate of 0-2(T !
l All temperature measurements wereobtah.ed with thernoco eles connected to the plant process computer which has a precision reference junction teuperature measuring circuit. This system has an accuracy over the range of -750F to 2000F of at least 0.75 F. Therefore:
2 0 (t )t = (0.75/2)2 = 0.141 OR I
l
- i
i f
3 d ;
' i i !
Using the weighting factors from Tables 2 and 3 gives:
e ,
i=21 T= { wti y l i=1 1 -
i=21 2
1 0 (T) =i=1{v f 2p2(t g) = (6. 7x10-2)(0.14) = 9.4x10-3 OR2 Estimate of (T2 (p)
The Heise gauge used to measure concainment pressure is readable
} to 0.02 psig and has a certified accuracy of 0.03 psiF The j
barometric pressure instrument with input to the plant computer 1
bas a certified accuracy of better than 0.01 psia. The results j in a combined error of:
2
- 2 O (P) = U 2(HEISE Readability) i + O (11EISE Accuracy) j +
)
O2 (Barometer accuracy) 4 02 (P) = [(0.02/2)2 + (0.05/2)2 + (0.01/2)2](27.7 inches H70)2
- 0.38 (inches water)2 Psi 1
Estimate of g 2 (3p) 1 2
The water filled manometer is readable to within 0.02-inches watei Considering that lef t and right legs of the manometer had to g be read gives:
l 02(a p). g2 (LLL) + g2(tg)
=
2(0.02/2)2 = 2x10-4 (inches water)2 1
- Estimate of U2(Pv) i .
l , The DE'a'CELS are certified to an accuracy of at Icast 0.1%
and the resulting system e ror will not exceed 0.3- inenes water vapor pressure. Therefore:
i=4 P ={
y wy[Pyg i=1 i=4 2
6 (Py ) = C w yf 2 02(Pyg) i=1
, . . . . - - . - - - .- - - -- - ~ . - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - ~ ~
i e .
[
]
i 2
6 (Py ) = (0.3/2)2 = 2.25x10-2 (inches water)2 j Using the weighting factors from Tables 2 and 3 gives: '
02 (Py ) = 5.8x10'3 (inches water)2 5.2.4 Estimate of Type A Test Error
(
i The overall measurement error is determined using the indicidual measurement variances in 5.2.3 and the following parameters obtained j from the test data:
L8 = 0.6406 wt%/ day oP 2 = 10.27 iaches water i
Po = 1564.19 inches water T = 537.39 R
~Py = 9.86 inches water ,
I The standard deviation becomes:
0'(L) = 0.0070 And the estiv.ated test error at the 95% confidence level is:
l
-+ 20(L) = 0.0050 5
The validity of the error analysis can be verified by comparing each 24-hour data comparison with the interval:
Lgt 260L)
All but one of the eight points falls in this range. The one point outside the estimated interval is 0.0018 below the lower limit.
~ .2.5 Estimate of Type A Test Veriffeation Err.r Measurement of the combined Icakage rate during verifiestion of l the accuracy of the Type A test was based on the average of six 1-hour data comparisons. The exprer ion fir estimated standard deviation in this case becomes:
6(L) = 24(0.0070) = 0.168 1
_ _ _J
i And the estimated verification test error is: '
I 1 2f7(L). ~+ 0.137
/6
~
The measured composite leakage was therefore:
- i Le = 1.188 1 0.137 i j The vessel leakage rate,q' , becomes:
1 L'=L V C
-L o
l
= 1.188 i 0.137 - 0. 6071
= 0.5809 1 0.137 This is in agreement with the test result of 0.6406. Therefore, the accuracy of the leakage measuring system is verified and the leakage rate result is validated.
l l
l r
O 4
e l
t
,, s,,-, , - , . - - , e. ,,,-m , . . -,r.. ,, . _ , , r .yn- , ~.,%-. -e- %,,e,r.- .,
i l
i TAB 12 1. SUM 4ARY OF TYPE B AND TYPE C TEST RESUL'IS l Type of Test leakage (scfh) No. Components No. Components As found As left Tested Needing Eepair
. Double Gasketed Seal 3 96 4.15 14 0 Type B Tests (combined leahace) i All other Type B i Tests 5.65 5 65 49 0 !
(combined leakage) j A31 Type C Tests except Main Steam NOTE 1 95 7 70 15 Isolation Valves NOTE 2 (combined leakage) 118 l NOTE 3 Main Steam Isolation l Values 8 h A0 2-80A & 2-86A l150 1,6 A0 2-80B & 2-86B 26 0 A0 2-80C & 2-86C 38 50 A0 2-80D & 2-86D 8.3 8.3 I
l NOTES: 1. Excessive leakage through seven valves prevented pressurizatior to full test pressure with the nomal testing apparatus i
and determination of an exact leakage rate.
Total leakage was in excess of the Technica.
i
, Specification limit.
- 2. Determined by sumntion of "as left" isolation valve leakage rates using only the higher leakage rate for two valves in series.
- 3. Determined by su=mation of all individual "as left" isolation valve leakage rates.
l
_20_
TABLE 2. DRYWELL DWCELS AND TFERMoCoUPLES lSensorType Sensor No. Computer' Location * }VolumeWeighting Point l Elevation Azimuth Factor Leweel 3 M175 933 090 0.2966 ,
l 4 M176 951 270
, 0.2966 l Thermocouple 1 l
- R196 1 933 000 0.0537 i 2 ,
R197 i 933 090 o.0537 3 : R198 '
933 180 0.0537
,! h l R199 933 270 0.0537
{ 5 ,
P270 966 000 8 0.0198
- 6 R271 951 090 l
' ' l o.0513 !
7 R272 951 180 ?
o.0513 l 8 R273 951 270 , 0.0513
- 9 R274 951 000 0.0513 3
lo R275 -
966 180 o.0198 11 R276 994 180 o.0235 4
12 R277 966 090 0.0198 13 R278 994 l 000 .
0.0235 14 R279 994 090 j
o.0235 15 R280 %6 270 0.o198
- 16 R281 994 270 o.0235 i _-
.i d
i 4
s j TABLE 3 TORUS DWCEIE AND TIERMoCoUPLES a
jSensor .jpe Sensor No. l Computer f location * !VolumeWeighting Point Elevation Azimuth Factor i Deveel 1 1
i l l M177 915 000 0.2034 ;
2 i M178 '
915 180 0.203L
- i '
- lThermocoupla f' 18 915 090 l 0.1017 !
i i 19 r R284P283
- 915 000 0.1017 l
, ! ! 20 ; P285 l 913 ,
270 0.1017 21 R286 l 915 ( 180 0.1017
- Referenced to the drywell floor at 920 5 FT, the toruc center line at 912 5 FT, and the drywell airlock at o degrees.
1 4 1
TABLE 4. TEST INSTRUMENT DATA -
Instrument Type Pange thnufacturer and Model No. Serial No. l Certified Accuracy and Method l of Certification Deveels -50 to Foxboro 2701 RG DM655 0.1 F Ibvcel RTD Temperature
+1420F Db618 by manufacturer. Comparison devpoint DLTT74 check usint; certified resistances I
DB616 at 45, 80, and 110 0F devpoint.
Thermocouples -75 to Various none Comparison check of computer
,+ 2000 F readout using certified themometer at 32, 60, 90 F.
Parometer 15-33 GE/MAC552 4532K1101 0.01-IN Eg IN Hg Comparison with certified test device at plant.
4 PI-2 Dryvell 0-50 Heise CM-3792 3792-TC- Comparison with certified absolute Pressure gauge PSIG 50-361 manometer at plant to 0.05 PSI.
PI-1 Reference , C-60 Helicold none 0.15 PSI Chamber Pres PSIG Comparison with certified test I
device at plant.
Controlled Bleed 0-4.6 Fischer and Porter 7112A0997- Predicted scales. Scales verified Rotameter SCFM A2 by commercial testin6 laboratory.
Decade box 0.01- Electroscientific DB62 043001 Certified by local commercial (deveel cal) 10KOHM Deksbox testing laboratory to 0.01 ohm.
Mercury 18-89 'Ihglinbue Div A7223 Certified by manufacturer to 0.1 F.
Thermometer F hhrshalltown mfg (thermocple cal)
Absolute Hg 80 inch hhriam Instrument Co. C-62181 Scales produced from master Manometer C-3375 traceable to Bureau or Standards (Ecise cal) 4 4
. _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ , _ . _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ - - - - _- - - --- --- - - - - - - " - - - - - ^ - " " ~ ' - - ^ ^ ^ ^ - - --
i l
TABLE 5. LOCATION OF PORTABLE CONTAINMENT FANS DRYWELL FANS r '
. Fan Number location l Elevation jAzimuth '
- , 933 i 090 i e
- 933 270 3 951 000 i h 951 180
- i I
TORUS FANS Fan Number Location Elevation Azimuth e 5 915 0'5 4
6 915 225
+
Peferenced to the drywell floor at 920 5 FT, the torus center line at 912 5 FT, and the dryvell airlock at 0 degrees.
l l
e O
P m g
-- -- y - - - m -- -yv.,. y et y e ,e--- ay - --c-+-- -w qgy3,--wr -re r tee-'1* + - g, y-N
i l
l l
l l
l l l P
DRWELL WIDE RANGE CONTROLLED BLEED PRESSURE TPANSMIITER ROTAMETER i i PT-7368 O i
$R ;*: a ,
t _
DRWELL r PRESSURE CONNECTION I
L LS-2997
,DRYWELL FLOOD IS/EL SWITCH REFERENCE I
CHAIEER N DRYWELL l SECTION l 20 FT ALL REFERENCE CHAMBER I SECTIONS CONSTRUCTED .J OF 2-INCH COPPER PIPE X-32 X-30E
[NN a a REFERENCE CHAMBER REFERENCE CH/)(BER CONNECTION VENT PIPE SECTION 1 5 FT l
~
~
- 'IDRUS
( SECTION
\ 15 FT i
l l FIG.1 Cross section of cont,ainment vessel showing i
, location of reference chamber and controlled bleed rotometer connection.
i '
. . 4 1
I i
I REFERENCE CHAb3 Pl-I PT-2 ,
EVACUATION AND FILL CONNECTION
(\
0-60 PSIG HELICOID 7 f 0-50 PSIG HEISE i
+ .- n 1
- P B C i
I -
FROM REFERENCE A D rROM DRwEtL CHAMBER CONNECTION PRESSURE CONNECTION j F\ G E
1 j -
4 i
- _ t<
_~
l!
i;
.l 36 n ' ATER FILLED l ii LJ i
!]I J U-TUBri MANOMBTER H:
l 1I i ;
i,i 1 ,
,1 i. __- !
l 4 i
--l l!
3 i1 y I.'
.: 1
. .i I
- i _-;
i j
ll DPi-l a
2 a
FIG. 2 Installation details of the test manometer
- and prescure Eauges.
I i
n
, o .
NITriOGEN VAPORIZER m_
/'
PS-3372 FE-3284 . . _ _ _m 1+-INCH FLEXIBLE HOSE NT I PRESSURE REG
\ (failed open)
C A - 377 CONTAINMENT PRESSURIZATION O EQUIPMENT SKID Y Mh FILTERS, CHILLER-DRYER, AND AIR COOLER PT-3283
+ -
WEST WALL OF REACIOR BUILDING -
M.
A0-238ib A0-2378 M QJ - { -
l-] -
g _g g__j Two 600-SCFM ROTARY AIR COMPRESSORS 18-INCH 20-INCH DRYWELL PURGE TORUS PURGE LINE LINE FIG. 3 Containment pressurization flow diagram.
APPENDIX A TYPE B AND TYPE C TEST DATA AND RESULTS TEST VOL i VALVE OR (FI3) i DECAY RATE (PSI / MIN) TECH SPEC PENETRATION MEASURED LEAK RATE (SCFH)
Note 1 AS FOUND AS LEFT LEAKAGE LIMIT AS FOUND AS LEFT X-100A 2.27 0.02 0.02 17.2 scfh 0.19 0.19 Note 4 Note 4 @ 41 psig X-1008 2.32 0.03 0.03 17.2 scfh 0.29 ' . 29 Note 4 Note 4 @ 41 psig X-100C 1.93 0.02 0.02 17.2 scfh 0.16 0.16 Note 4 Note 4 @ 41 psig X-100D 2,06 0.02 0.02 17.2 scfh 0.17 0.17 Note 4 Note 4 @ 41 psig i X-101B 1.94 0.01 0.01 17.2 scfh 0.08 0.08 l Note 4 Note 4 l
@ 41 psig X-101D 1.98 '
O.12 0.12 17.2 scfh 1.0 1.0 j Note 4 Note 4 @ 41 psig j X-103 2.06 0.02 0.02
[ 17.2 scfh 0.17 0.17 Note 4 Note 4 @ 41 psig i X-104A 1.95 0.03 0.03 l
' 17.2 scfh 0.25 0.25
@ 41 psig ;
i X-104B 2.07 6 307 0.007 l 17.2 scfh 0.06 0.06 Note 4 Note 4 @ 41 psig 4
X-104C 1.94 0.02 0.02 i j 17.2 scfh 0.16 0.16 i '
. Note 4 Note 4 l @ 41 psig X-104D 2.06 l 0.02 0.02 17.2 scfh 0.17 0.17 l . Note 4 Note 4 l 0 41 psig X-105A 1.93 0.02 0.02 i 17.2 scfh : 0.16 0.16
{ ! Note 4 ! Note 4 @ 41 psig X-105C 2.06 0.04 0.04 17.2 scfh i 0.35 0.35 I Note 4 i Note 4
! l
, @ 41 psig ,
) ;
X-105D 1.94 0.08 0.08 l 17.2 scfh O.66 0.66 4
Note 4 Note 4 l @ 41 psig A0 2541A 0.064 0.08 0.08
& A0 2541B ,
17.2 scfh 0.02 0.02 Note 4 Note 4 l @ 41 psig i
A0 2561A 0.064 0.08 0.08
- & A0 2561B 17.2 scfh 0.02 0.02 Note 4 Note 4 . @ 41 psig 8 4 i
_ _ _ _ - - L
- - - - _ . - , - , m. . , , , . . - . - ,w . , , , . -~y,-v y c.w... -e--w-w..-.. . ,, y.-,,e . . . . . y-.+
, APPENDIX A (cont)
TY/E B AND TYPE C TEST DATA AND RESULTS
! TEST VOL } l VALVE OR (PT ) DECAY RATE (PSI / MIN) TECH SPEC MEASURED LEAK RATE (SCFH)
PENETRATION Note 1 AS FOUND j AS LEFT LEAKAGE LIMIT AS FOUND AS LEFT CV 3305 & 0.041 0.07 0.07 17.2 scfh 0.01 0.01 CV 3306 Note 4 Note 4 @ 41 psig CV 3307 & 0.039 0.15 0.15 17.2 scfh 0.03 0.03 CV 3308 Note 4 Note 4 @ 41 psig CV 3309 & 0.042 0 0 17.2 scfh 0 0 CV 3310 Note 4 Note 4 @ 41 psig CV 3311 6 0.044 0.68 0.68 17.2 scfh 0.13 0.13 CV 3312 Note 4 Note 4 @ 41 psig CV 3313 & 0.035 1.43 1.43 17. 2. se fh 0.21 0.21 CV 3314 Note 4 Note 4 @ 41 psig CV 3267, 1.17 1.67 0 17.2 scfh 8.3 0 CV 3268 & Note 4 Note 4 @ 41 psig CV 3269 -
MO 2373 & 0.973 6.59 1.92 17.2 scfh 26 7.6 M0 2374 ; @ 41 psig A0 2-8DA & ! 40.74 ?
6.9 0.01 ! 11.5 scfh 1150 1.6 A0 2-86A I @ 25 psig i
A0 2-80B & 40.74 0.16 0 l 11.5 scfh 26 0 A0 2-86E : @ 25 psig A0 2-80C & 40.74 0.23 0.03 l 11.5 scfh 38 5.0 A0 2-86C @ 25 psig
}
A0 2-80D 40.74 0.05 0.05 11.5 scfh 8.3 8.3 A0 2-86D @ 25 psig ,
A0 2379 6 11.8 0.16 0.03
~
17.2 scfh : 8.0 1.5 DW 8-2 Note 4 @ 41 psig l l
, A0 2380 & 11.8 0.036 0.02 I 17.2 scfh i 1.8 0.96
. DW 8-1 .
Note 4 @ 41 psig
{ l j l
- A0 2377, 210 O.60 0.00256 ,
17.2 scfh 510 2.19
- A0 2378 6 i G 41 psig A0 2381 I
A0 2386, 3.7 0.047 0.06 i 17.2 scfh 0.71 0.91 A0 2387 & @ 41 psig l {
CV 2385 .
I t A0 2896, 3.7 0.12 0.05 ; 17.2 scGi 1.9 i 0.76 A0 2383 & Note 4
@ 41 psig ,
CV 2384 1
, APPENDIX A (cont)
TYPE B AND TYPE C TEST DATA AND RESULTS VAVE OR (FT3 ) VOL l DECAY RATETECH TEST 4 (PSISPEC / MIN)MEASURED LEAK RATE (SCFH)
PENETRATION Note 1 ~AS FOUND AS LEFT LEAKAGE LIMIT AS FOUND AS LEFT MD 2034 6 10.40 0 0 17.2 scfh 0 0 M0 2035 @ 41 psig HPCI-9 6.7 34.5 0.27 17. 2 sc fh 940 7.4
@ 41 psig HPCI-14 0.054 75.2 0 17. 2 sc fh 16,6 0
@ 41 psig CV 2790 6 2.53 0.227 0.227 17.2 scfh 2.3 CV 2791 2.3
@ 41 psig MO 2075 6 1.48 0.01 0.01 17. 2 sc fh 0.06 MD 2076 0.06
@ 41 psig RCIC-9 1.1 300 2.53 17.2 scfh 1350 11.3
@ 41 psig RCIC-16 0.06 Note 3 13.95 17.2 scfh Note 3 3.4
, @ 41 psig XP-6 0.18 Note 3 3.99 17.2 scfh Note 3 2.9
@ 41 psig MO 2397 6 1.7 0.04 0.04 17.2 scfh 0.28 0.28 MD 2398 @ 41 psig FW-94-1 27 Note 3 0.01 17.2 scfh Pete 3 1.1 6 41 psig FW-94-2 27 Note 3 0.32 17.2 scfh Nc'_e 3 2.2
@ 41 psig FW-97-1 6.9 Note 3 0.03 17.2 scfh Note 3 0.84
@ 41 psig FW-97-2 6.9 0.02 0.02 17.2 scfh
- 0.56 0.56
@ 41 psig A0-10-46A 44.1 J 0.12 0.02 17.2 scfh 21.6 t ' j 3.6
., @ 41 psig A0-10-46B 43.7 0.02 0.02 17.2 scfh 3.6 3.6
@ 41 psig I
i .
u__ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
I
APPENDIX A (cont)
TYPE B AND TYPE C TEST DATA AND RESULTS TEST VOL VALVE OR (FT3 ) DECAY RATE (PSI / MIN) TECH SPEC MEASURED LEAK RATE (SCFH)
PENETRATION Note 1 AS FOUND AS LEFT LEAKAGE LIMIT AS FOUND AS LEFT MO-2014 80.9 0.02 0.02 17. 2 sc fh 6.6 6.6
@ 41 psig MO-2015 77.1 0 0 17.2 scfh 0 0
@ 41 psig MO-2020 & 5.93 4.25 0 17.2 scfh 103 0 MO-2022 @ 41 psig MO-2021 6 13.7 0.05 0.05 17. 2 scfh MO-2023 2.8 2.8
@ 41 psig MO-2JS & 1.23 0.04 04 17. 2 sc fh MO-2027 0.20 0.20
@ 41 psig MO-2029 6 58.6 Note 3 0.01 17.2 scfh Note 3 2.4 MO-2030 @ 41 psig
, MO-1751 11.08 0.01 0.01 17. 2 sc fh ; 0.45 0.45
@ 41 psig MO-1753 8.26 0.01 0.01 17.2 scfh 0.34 0.34
@ 41 psig l A0-14-13A 2.53 93.5 1.33 17.2 scfh 970
- 13.7
@ 41 psig 4
MO-1752 12 0.18 0.18 17. 2 sc fh 8.8 8.8
@ 41 psig i MO-1754 7.13 0 0 17. 2 s c Di 0
' 0 f @ 41 psig A0-14-13B 1.69 Note 3 2.0 17. 2 sc fh i Note 3 13.8 P ',1 psig
)
CRD-31 1.2 20.0 0.03 17.2 scfh 98 0.15
, @ 41 psig l
. Airlock 380 0 0 Ensure l 0 0 sealing Note 6 l 1
@ 10 psig Airlock O.012 0 0 17. 2 sc fh 0 0 t E1cetrical
@ 41 psig '
Penetration (Inner)
I-PPENDIX A (cent)
TYPE B AND TYPE C TEST DATA AND RESULTS TEST VGL l
'.' VALVE OR (FT3 ) I DECAY RATE (PSI / MIN) TECH SPEC MEASURED LEAK RATE (SCFH)
PENETPA TION Note 1 ' AS FOUND AS LEFI LEAKAGE LIMIT AS FOUND AS LEFI i
I Airlock 0.012 0 0 17.2 st 3 0 0 i j Electrical @ 41 psi.E l
} Pene t ra tion 1 (Outer) ,
i Torus 0.019 0. 0 7 ', 0.077 Note 2 0.003 0.003 Manvay Note 6 ;
l West '
Torus 0.0109/ 0.036 0.10 Note 2 0.002 l 0.f 1: t 005 Manway hote 6 I N ta 5 East i
Dry.. 11 0.0109/ 0.10 0 05 0.009 0.016
.. te 2 0.006 Head Note 5 Note 6 0.016 Drywell 0.02 0.02 Note 2 0.001 0.001 Head
. hanw r Note 6 d
Q: - " ? .' O.w 0.01 Note 2 0.003 0.0005 Manwcy Note 6
, Dt,; 1 0.0109/ 24 25.7 Note 2 1.1 1.3 Equipment 0.012 Hatch Note 5 Note 6
^
l 4
j 1 Seismic 0.016 2.67 2.67 Note 2 0.18 0.18 i Restraint Note 4 Note 4 Port A 6 i j f i j Seismic 0.016 0.073 0. c ' ' Note 2 0.005 0.005 Restraint Note 4 Note a Port B f
Seismic 0.016 0.05 '.05 Note 2 0.003 0.003 Restraint Note 4 Note 4
' Port C i , Seismic 0.016 28.6 28.6 Note 2 1.9 1.9 Restrain t Note 4 Note 4
.; - Port D j
j Seismic 0.016 0.06 0.06 '
i Note 2 0.004 0.004 Restraint Note 4 Note 4 Port E 1
l p --
, APPENDIX A (cont)
M B AND TYPE C TEST DATA AND RESULTt TEST VOL VALVE OR (FT3 ) DECAY RATE (PSI / MIN) TE Q SPEC P521ETRAT10N MEAStdED LEAK RATE (SCPH)
Note 1 AS FOUND AS LEFT LEAKAGE LIMIT , /S FOUND AS LEFT S ,
Seismic 0.016 0.04 0.04 Note 2 0.003 i l 0.003 Restraint Note 4 Note 4 >
l Port F Seismic 0.016 Note 2 0.005 0.005
'~
Restraint Note 4 Note 4 Port G Seismic 0.016 10.9 10.9 Note 2 0.74 0.74 Restraint Notc. 4 Note 4 Port H X-7A 0.016 0.23 0.23 17.2 scGi 0,015 Inboard , 0.015 .
@ 41 psig i
X-7A 0.s16 0 0 IL2 refh 0 0 Gutboard @ 41 psig X-73 0.016 ;0.1 10.1 17.2 scfh 0.684 0.684 Inboard @ 41 psig X-7B 0.016 0 0 17.2 scfh 0 0 Outboard @ 41 psig X-7C 0.016 0.37 0.37 17.2 scfh Inboard 0.025 0.025
@ 41 psig X-7C 0.016 0 0 17.2 scfh 0 0 Outboard @ 41 psig X-7D 0.016 0.02 0.02 17.2 scfh Inboard 0.001 0.("
@ 41 psig X-7D 0.016 0.18 0.18 17.2 scfh Outboard 0.012 0.012
@ 41 psig X-8A 0.016 0.95 0.95 17.2 scfh Inboard 0.064 0.064
@ 41 psig X-8A 0.016 0.30 0.30 17.2 scfh
- Outboard 0.020 0.020
@ 41 psig X-9A 0.016 0.03 0.03 17.2 scfh Inboard 0.002 0.002
@ 41 psig X-9A 0.016 10.9 10.9 17.2 scfh 0.74 0.74 Outboard @ 41 psig
^
APPENDIX A (cont)
TYPE B AND IYPE C TEST DATA AND RESULTS VALVE OR g DECAY RATE (PSI / MIN) TECH SPEC MEASURED LEAK RATE (SCFH)
PENETRATION AS FOUND AS LEFT LEAKAGE LIMIT Note 1 AS FOUND AS LEFT X-9B 0.016 0.02 0.02 .2 scfh 0.001 0.001 Inboard 41 psig X-9B 0.016 0 0 17.2 scfh 0 00 N. board @ 41 psig X-10 0.016 0.01 0.01 17.2 scfh 0.001 0.001 Inboard @ 41 psig X-10 0.016 0.25 0.25 17.2 scfh 0.017 0.017 Outboard @ 41 psig X-11 0.016 0.17 0.17 17.2 scfh 0.012 0.012 Inboard @ 41 psig X-11 0.016 0.13 0.13 17.2 scih 0.009 0.009 Outboard @ 41 psig X-12 0.016 0.02 0.02 17.2 psig 0.001 0.001 Inboard @ 41 psig X-12 0.016 0.01 '
O.01 17.2 scfh 0.001 0.001 Outboard @ 41 psig t
X-13A 0.016 0 O 17.2 scfh 0 0 Inboard @ 41 psig I
X-13A 0.016 0.63 0.63 17.2 scfh l 0.043 0.043 Outboard I @ 41 psig X-13B 0.016 0 0 17.2 scfh 0 0 Inboe.rd @ 41 psig l
X-13B 0.016 0.06 0.06 17.2 scfh 0.004 0.034 Outboard I @ 41 psig X-14 0.016 0.19 0.19 17.2 scfh 0.013 0.013
, Inboard @ 41 psig ,
g X-14 0.016 0.02 0.02 17.2 scfh i 0.014
- Outboard 0.014
- @ 41 psig X-16A 0.016 0.01 0.01 17.2 scfh 0.001 0.001 Inboard i
@ 41 psig f
X-16A 0.016 0 0 17.2 scfh 0 0 Outboard i @ 41 psig
}
I i
l 1
o APPENDIX A (cont)
TYPE B AND TYPE C TEST DATA AND RESULTS TEST VOL VALVE OR 3 (FT ) I DECAY RATE (PSI / MIN) TECH SPEC MEASURED LEAK RATE (SCFH)
Pf*NETRATION Note 1 i AS FOUND AS LEFT LEAKAGE LIME AS FOUND AS LEFT _
X-16B 0.016 0.02 0.02 17.2 scfh 0.001 0.001 Inboard @ 41 psig X-16B 0.016 1.33 1.33 17.2 scfh 0.090 0.090 Outboard @ 41 psig X-17 0.016 0.13 0.13 17.2 sefh 0.009 0.009 l Inboard @ 41 psig i
0.016
, X-17 0.28 0.28 17.2 scfh 0.019 0.019 )
Outboard @ 41 psig NOTES : 1. The volumes of the toroidal spaces in the doubic-gasketed seals are uncertain due to the presence of flexible rubber, and in any case are quite small. For all seals except the drywell head, the volume of the test rig was used as the test volume. For the drywell head, twice the volume of the test rig was used as the test volume.
The expansion bellows and airlock electrical penetration similarly have a small volume and the volume of the test rig was used as ;
the test volume.
)
In all other cases the tabulated test volume includes the volume of the test rig.
l
- 2. The Technical :.;,ecification for double-gasLeted scals is that the '
total leakage not exceed 34.4 refh/hr @ 41 psig. No specification is given for an individual deoble-gasketed seal.
- 3. Excessive leakage prevented full pressurization to test pressure.
Leakage estimated to be in excess of 200 scfh.
- 4. Tested using nitrogen.
- 5. Different test apparatus used in as found and as lef t leakage tests.
6 The "as left" leak rate for these penetrations was the leak rate measured irraediately prior to the integrated lenkage rate test. All Type 3 penetrationc opened for the outage were retested when closed.
_ . _ _ . - - ,_ _-. ._ _ ~ __ . _ _ .
~34-l APPENDIX B
SUMMARY
REPORT OF ALL TYPE C TESTS FATLING TO MEET THE LEAKACE ACCEPTANCE CRTTERTA 4
Local leakage tests were conducted on all testable containment isolation valves during the 1973 Monticello spring outage. Of the 78 valves tested, 19 failed to meet the applicable in( ividual leakage limit. Eleven other valver required maintenance either to meet the total Type B and Type C leakage limit or to backfit improvements. Table B-1 is a summary of all valve maintenance performed during this period.
A decision was made early in planning for the outage to comply as fully {
as possible with 10 CFR 50, Appendix J. As a result, 33 isolation valves !
were tested which had not been tested previously. Repairs to improve l 1eak tightness were required for 13 of these valves. The greatly expanded scope of the Type C testing, therefore, led to the discovery and repair of a large number of isolation valves with excessive leakage rates. A major portion of the 1973 spring outage was' devoted to this repair work.
With the following exceptions, all maintenance consisted of routine actions such as cleaning and lapping:
a) Main Steam Isolation Valves The four MSIV's with greater than allowable leakage were disassembled and the pilot valve and main poppet discs and seats were examined. No physical defects, such as cracks, chips or scratches could be observed. Due to lapping operations performed on A0-2-86A in January 1972, a snall amount of base me. O had been exposed through the valve seat. Stellite was depe-ited on the main seat area. Following the stellite deposit, excess stellite was cut away and the seat was lapped.
Past maintenance experience on these valves has shown that the best practice is to assure flat seating surfaces on all i seating components. Therefore, even though no physical defects {
were observed, the main poppet and pilot valve discs on all four valves received a truing cut and the valve seats were lightly lapped. Low spots on the main poppet seats were observed following this light lapping operation. Additional
. lapping resulted in proper seating of the main poppet. It is
, believed the low spots were a result of seat warpare that occurs when stresses in the valve body are relieved at operating temperature. l b) Main Feedwater Check Valves The three valves with excessive leakage were disassembled and the valve internals examined. This examination showed that on all three valves the upper portion of the valve disc was !
mating with the valve seat too early in the valve travel. This prevented the lower portion of the disc from seating properly. i l
To get the valve disc to mate with the seat uniform 1v, the disc hinge arm for each of the valves was bent approximately 0.08 inches'.
Although'there was no indication of actual '
seating surface irregularities, the valve disc seating surfaces were ground flat and the valve seats were lapped.
,- c) Primary Containment Atmospherc Control System Valves ~
l All valves in the system satisfied the Technical Specification '
leakage limit with the exception of AO-2378 (the suppression l chamber purge inlet valve) . A0-2378 is a butterfly type design with an inflatable rubber seal in the valve body for positive l valve disc sealing. The valve is designed so that the disc ;
travels in the closing direction until it contacts a mechanical stop. An actuating arm attached to the valve shaf t then opens !
a seal pilot valve to pressurize the T-ring seal. There are j eight additional valves in the system that are of the same design i as A0-2378. These valves are the drywell and suppression chamber {
vent and purge valves and the reactor building to suppression chamber vacuum breakers.
As a result of previous problems with this type valve, it was decided to disassemble and inspect all nine valves of this design.
This inspection revealed that, on several of the valves, an i interference existed between the valve disc circumference and the ;
inner diameter of the T-ring seal. This interference prevented 1 the valve disc from traveling to the fully closed mechanical stop.
The pilot valve actuating arm had been adjusted so that the seal l
was inflated when the valve travel stopped even though contact had not been made with the mechanical stop. With the T-ring seal inflated, the seating surfaces of the disc and seal were not properly aligned causing excessive leakage.
The inspection also revealed dust, rust particles, and lubricant residue in the areas where the seal made contact with the valve body and with the retaining ring. One valve, A0-2379, was found to have the T-Ring seal retaining ring machined incorrectly.
Replacement seals for the 18-inch valves also exhibited valve 1 disc interference. The seals were returned to the manufacturer and the inside diameter was increased by 0.020 inches. Replacement seals for the 20-inch valves were satisfactory as received.
No disc to seal interference was experienced following installation of the new seals and all valves were adjusted to ensure travel to the mechanical stop prior to seal inflation. Following these repairs, a satisfactory leakage rate was demonstrated for each of the nine T-Ring seal valves.
l l
I 1
i J
i 4
i d) Standbv Licuid Control Isoletion Check valve i
l The disc arm for XP-6, the outboard isolation check valve '
in the poison addition line, was found improperly assemblec.
This was the first tire XP-6 was leakage tested, and it must be assumed the valve was defective since installation. The
, arm was reversed and the seat lightly lapped to restore the valve to satisfactory tightness. '
The repairs outlined above and in Table B-1 restored all valves with leakage ,
in excess of the Technical Specification limits to a satisfactory condition. l Tests to be conducted during future refueling outages are expected to result in significantly reduced leakage rates as a consequence of this extensive investigation and repair effort.
i l
l l
l l
a e
=
l l
y y -
r-r --+ "-
^ '
d APPENDIX B TABLE B-1 *
SUMMARY
OF CONTAINMENT ISOLATION VALVE REPAIRS REOUIRED DURING 1973 SPRING OUTAGE ,
Previously Repairs Necessary to Meet Isolation Valve No. Function Tested? Type C Leakage Specifications CV-3267 1-inch inboard nitrogen yes Teflon seating washer turned makeup isolation valve over and seat cleaned MO-2373 3-inch inboard main steam yes Seat cleaned and lapped line drain valve New stem installed MO-2374 3-inch outboard main steam yes Seat cleaned and lapped f line drain valve A0-2377, 2378, 2379 18-inch and 20-inch yes Seal areas cleaned and T-Ring d, 2380, 2381, 2383 butterfly type containment seals replaced with resized y 2386,.2387, 2896 atmosphere control valves seals to eliminate disc interference HPCI-9 16-inch HPCI steam exhaust no Seat cleaned and lapped to torus outboard check valve
.HPCI-14 2-inch HPCI steam drains to no Seat cleaned and lapped torus outboard check valve-RCIC-9 8-inch RCIC steam exhaust to no Seat cleaned and lapped torus outboard check valve RCIC-16 '2-inch RCIC steam drains no Seat cleaned and lapped to torus outboard check valve XP-6 1.5-inch standby liquid no Dise arm found installed control system outboard backwards. Reinstalled check valve correctly and lightly lapped
APPENDIX B TABLE B-1 (cont)
SUMMARY
OF CONTAINMENT ISOLATION VALVE REPAIRS REOUIRED DURING 1973 SPRING OUTAGE Previously Repairs Necessary to Meet Isolation Valve No. Function Tested? Type C Leakage Specifications FW-94-1 14-inch feedwater check no Disc hinge arms bent to improve W-94-2 valves disc-seat alignment. Seating FW-97-1 surfaces ground flat and lapped A0-10-46A 16-inch RHR to recirc loop no Cap seal replaced. Internals A testable check valve cleaned MO-2020 10-inch low er containment no Truing cut made on gate. Seat spray outbcard isolation lapped b MO-2030 18-inch shutdown cooling i no Truing cut made on gate. Seat suction outboard isolation lapped valve A0-14-13A 8-inch core spary no Seats cleaned AO-14-13B testable check valves Truing cut made on discs CRD-31 3-inch control rod drive no Seat cleaned and lapped hydraulic exhaust check valve A0-2-80A 18-inch main steam yes Truing cut made on main disc.
isolation valve Pilot seat and main seat lapped.
A0-2-86A 18-inch main steam yes Truing cut made on main disc.
isolation valve Stellite Ceposited on main seat.
Pilot Jeat and main seat lapped.
~
APPENDIX B TABLE B-1 (cont)
SUmtARY OF CONTAINMENT ISOLATION 1rALVE REPAIRS REQUIRED DURING 197~ SPRING OUTAGE Previously Repairs Necesse.ry to Meet Isolation Valve No. Function Tested? Type C I,eakage Specification A0-2-86B 18-inch main steam yes Truing cut made on main disc. ,
I isolation <alve Pilot seat and main seat lapped A0-2-80C 18-inch main steam yes Truing cut made on main disc.
isolation valve Pilot seat and main seat lapped
/
l
~
APPENDIX C TYPE A TEST DATA AND CALCULATIONS I
CONTAINMENT PRES CONTAIRIENT AVG CONTAINMENT AVG VAP CONTAINMENT-REF CHMiB TEST INTERVAL CALCULATED LEAK ATE TIME (PSIA) (IN H2O) TEMP (OR) PRES (IN H2O) DIFF PRES (IN H2O) (HOURS) RATE (W17./24-HR),
4-73 0600 56.53 1564.19 535.74 9.37 0 -
J 0700 56.53 1564. 19 535.94 9.38 -0.05 -
0800 56.54 1564.46 536.13 9.46 -0.15 -
~
0900 56.56 1565.02 536.29 9.52 -0.40 -
1000 56.61 1566.40 536.49 9.45 -1.00 -
1100 56.63 1566.95 536.73 9.68 -1.20 - PERIOD OF GTABILIZATION 1200 56.65 1567.51 536.73 9.81 -1.75 - 0F TEST CONDITIONS 1300 56.66 1567.78 536.82 9.60 -1.70 -
1400 56.67 1568.06 536.98 9.64 -1.70 -
1500 56.68 1568.33 537.02 9.56 -1.50 -
1600 56.67 1568.06 537.07 9.57 -1.10 -
l 1700 56.65 1567.50 537.11 l 9.67 -0,75 -
y 1800 56.64 1567.23 537.17 9.55 -0.65 - -
1 1900 56.62 1566.68 537.37 9.76 -0.45 1 0.6264 2000 56.62 1566.68 537.18 9.73 -0.15 1 0.4214 2100 56.61 1566.40 537.13 9.70 0.16 1 0.7413 l
2200 56.59 1565.84 537.03 9.74 1 0.7430 2300 56.59 1565.84 537.13 9.90 1 0.9222
.m --
--- ---- s---w...- - - - - - - - - - . , ra++'<.,.r---
. , - . - - -., - , , - - . . . - - - < , - . + . - -- .-g---. e-. w--- - --o-e+-=.- - -- w - -- - - - - - - . - - - - - . - . - . - .
APPENDIX C (cont)
TYPE A TEST ~ DATA Alg_CALCUIATIONS *
- [ CONTAINMENT PRES CONTAINMF2iT AVG CONTAINMENT AVG VAP CONTAINMENT-REF CIM TEST INTERVAL CALCULATED LEAK,
.iTE TIME (PSIA) (IN 112 0) TEMP (OR) PRES (IN 110)2 D1FF PRES (IN 110) 2 (IIOURS) RATE (WI7./24-ilR) 1 i-73 0000 56.57 1565.29 537.22 9.85 1.60 1 0.4752 l0100 56.56 1565.02 537.18 9.82 2.00 1 0.5727 i
j0200 56.53 1564.19 537.14 9.88 2.42 1 0.7422 0300 56.50 1563.36 537.22 9.96 2.86 1 0.8000 0400 56.51 1563.63 537.23 10.00 3.23 1 0.6331 0500 56.48 1562.80 537.67 9.99 3.69 1 0.6779 0600 56.47 1562.52 537.40 9.98 4.10 1 0.6292 0700 56.45 1561.97 537.37 9.98 4.43 1 0.5114 0800 56.44 1561.70 537.44 10.01 4.90 1 0.7702 0900 56.42 1561.14 537.51 10.08 5.36 1 0.8166 1000 56.41 1560.86 537.71 10.08 5.79 '
1 0.6562 1100 56.39 1560.31 537.83 9.96 6.21 h 1 0.4587 l
1200 56.39 1560.31 537.83 10.01 6.62 1 0.7121 1300 56.39 1560.31 537.90 10.04 7.12 1 0.8170 1400 56.37 1554.76 537.98 10.08 7.52 1 0.6771 1500 56.36 1559.48 551.95 10.03 7.98 1 0.6365 1600 56.36 1554.48 537.98 10.09 8.23 1 0.4786 1100 56.35 1559.20 538.12 10.09 8.55 1 0.4882 l
APPENDIX C (cont)
TYPE A TEST DATA AND CALCU!ATIONS CONTAINMFST PRES CONTAINttENT AVG CONTAINMENT AVG VAP' CONTAINMENT-REF CilAMBTEST INTERVAL CALCULATED LEA)
) ATE TIME (PSIA) (IN 1120) TEMP ("R) PRES (IN 110) 2 DIFF PRES (IN ll 20) (110URS) RATE (Wr7./24-11R)
'5-73 1800 56.34 1558.93 538.12 10.01 8.90 1 0.4183 1900 56.33 1558.65 538.20 10.17 9.30 1 0.8632 2000 56.31 1558.10 538.24 10.03 9.70 1 0.4007 2100 56.29 1557.54 538.40 10.18 10.10 '
O.8433 2200 56.28 1557.27 538.34 10.03 10.50 1 0.3913 2300 56.28 1557.27 538.38 10.06 10.85 1 0.5870 6-73 0000 56.25 1556.44 538.35 10.12 11.25 1 0.7154 0100 56.25 1556.44 538.43 10.18 11.53 1 0.5227 CALCUIATION OF INTEGRATED CONTAINMENT LEAKAGE RATE BASED ON 24 Il0UR DATA COMPARISONS 5-73 1800 56.34 1558.93 538.12 10.01 8.90 24 0.6405 1900 56.33 1558.65 538.20 10.17 9.30 24 0.6506 2000 56.31 1558.10 538.24 10.03 9.70 24 0.6494 2100 56.29 1557.54 538.40 10.18 10.10 24 0.6534 2200 56.28 1557.27 538.34 10.03 10.50 24 0.6388 2300 56.28 1557.23 538.38 10.06 10.85 24 0.6248 6-73 0000 56.25 1556.44 538.35 10.12 11.25 24 0.6349 ,
0100 56.25 1556.44 538.43 10.18 11.53 24 0.6327 AVERAGE OF EIGitT 0.6406
b tt - 5ft{' , ' ! L ' .;i > j F 4
o -
,su' .
~
i>'
- 4 8 -
~'
4 1
_ 7 .
!I .i
~
i i4l!
1 i lI
..f'^l l
L. i .
1 _
~
7-' , ' . t i
_ {
lLI
- 6 _
~
I t !t 1 l ! 1
~ .
I t .t i
~ I. : . .!
!il- f l
- p. 5 il
~ - ~
1
~
- i N . . :
h 1
Z2 . -
i e O i ;'
' ij: 3 1
i c -
l ' , ' .
} ia ' i i+
l!_ 1 2
s
~ _ _
n .
_ - ~
~ _
o -
1 i
! i- i l!t+ 1 l : .i ' i - i - ' , . il , 1 ! i 1 t a _
i
. - l _
_ u .
"ll ,
.' li Li 2 1 ;. i o c .
_.,l -~ l l _
a _
p1 c
. ~
i 1ti !. .l i i ,Ii 1 .
- I 9 e _
,il!
tl- 0 t .
~
a .
^ -
_ Y r -
r
' i.i I!+ i , ,I : il , l ![ i 8 A k I l l'
. 0 D a F e
_ l O _
lI. I I!l! ' 4 , ,
. t l l g !I l1- 7 y .
r c E l M r .
o 6 I u .
t T o
.'( !,
l .
h . I
,l3 4 6
li-l , 6 0 D N
h .
i' 40 f
~ - 2 . A o i ' t i
= . 5 .
4 0 ET 1
- T3 . 7l j t -
HN o Go i!_' A .
l ..
D p
. I S i ! . .
. t i F BI FA R
- j I-4 0 t n
OP - i o
M
- ' l ' l l ! ' .I i '
Eo . ' ;' , 3 p _
. _ Gc 0 A o
- Rn t
, F ,. _ _.
Eu _
.i ' l
!. I ; l i
!_. Vo II . j 2 t An _ 0 n .
i
- _. _ o --
i II l , ;; ' _ P i i It l ,l ii jI l .
_ _ o3 1 7
- I,!
lI ri
~ _
0 /5
/ C -
,l l
]
{ \gI .ii l ,l jl 0 5 G
_ I .
O ,.
i 1 4
.. . _ . - ._ _. _ . - - _ . ~ . . _ _ L. - _- - _- _, .
'i I
} _ 4 __ . . t . _ _ _ _ __._e i H O
I' emi .m. + -.-g r-4 e
N m O I H 1
I 3 4
e p
._ _ . __ _ _. .._.6_. _.
i
]
! u 1 I
. i .. _ . . . .
p u
s l v
.)
.. __ l' ..
l
. . . g _ _.. --. .. . . .. _.--, _
_ _ .. O 5 C
?
3 y 1
. _ _ _ _ __. __ _. a _ _
_ . _ .ieoe w
a g v
NO M g
_.-_ L .a '
{
3 OO 8
! N C)
- .a.
O o i
.c NN N k. ._ . _
_g b I Oh s o O
.I . _ __y _o 8 i o g"8 2
g,g g i 36 mm o i
. _ _ .. o 9 I_._ 0 l i , % a
. i 4 0
__3 ._ _ .. _ .
v o e
i l .
c o'
t l i
.________._. _ . _ . _ _ g .,
c l l 0
- ; , 3_.------- yg x 1
g/ ._ ___ _ sw g e g
APPENDIX D TYPE A TEST VERIFICATION DATA AND CALCULATIONS [
CONTAINMENT PRES CONTAINMENT AVG CONTAINMENT AVG VAP CONTAINMENT-REF CIIAMB TEST INTERVAL CALCUIATED II)
DATE TIME (PSIA) (IN 110) TEMP (OR) PRES (IN 110) DIFF PRES (IN 110) (110URS) RATE (R"7./24-lTF 2 2 2 i-7-73 0200 55.74 1542.33 538.84 10.15 2.82 - -
0300 55.69 1540.94 538.90 10.10 3.66 1 1.2351 0400 55.67 1540.39 538.93 10.17 4.55 1 1.5038 0500 55.65 1539.84 539.00 10.08 5.25 1 0.9536 0600 55.65 1539.84 534.03 10.17 5.90 1 1.1596 0700 55.50 1537.90 538.99 10.16 6.70 1 1.2415 0800 55.57 1537.62 539.02 10.07 7.45 1 1.0353 AVERAGE OF SIX 1.188 ,
Composite Icakage Rate (wt%/ day) = Le = 1.188 Estimated Ermr = + 0.137 Controlled Bleed Rate (wt%/ day) =Iy= 0.6071 Vess 1 Leakage Rate (wt%/ day) =I =1.188 + 0.137 - 0.6071 = 0 580910.137 Acturt.. Vessel Leakage Rate (wt%/ day) = Iy= 0.6hC6
>. e . .
_q _ _ _ _ . _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . __
ra _ _ _ _. _
1.k ._._ __
l
_.__ _ _ _ . J ._ _t . _ _ _
l.2 L----- J , _ . - - - - _1 __-.----.L_- '
l I I I if] I
! l AVERAGE OF GIX 1-IIH~~
___. ' _ -- _j__.__l _ .
_L. . . p _ _ .
i _ _ . ' _ _ _ _ ; _.
l
.COMEARIGONG = 1.188 l
- - f-l
- - - j- - --U i ,
- -- - J ---
i i 1 i ; , ,
i i ! 6 1.0-I I i
+'
i l -- ' - -+----
i h--!
i i h - !
I, I
r--
i .
i i i , .
t : ,
i I '
' ' i
_. .t _ -_ ._ _ -. -
.- __ l___ - n s'
l --
m l l . . _
- 0.
8 W 4 ,
k p . _ .* x
.i g
Co.6 ' i
' T m l l e j l l 4 l t- . _ _ _
l 40.h. __
- - - -l .
q l _. 4 , __.__ _- - ..._.__;- ,
1 i
i l l 1 l i j l
.____l___ l. I' '
- r. - - - . _ . _ .
___t ,
-~
i .- - .. ;
i '
o.2 t 4 ,_
~'_
~ *
- ._ - I !~
~
- r-
~.._
~ ..!Z
_y
~~ ~
. .a ;
.q.5 l
g 00 01 02 03 0 14 05 06 07 OB 09 lo 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 16 21 22 00 19 20 23 5/7/73 DATE AND TD4E OF DAY 5/8/73 l FIG. D-1 Point to point plot of hourly leak rate calculations l
vith 0.6071 WT%/24 HR controlled bleed in progress, i
- _ , . - - . . .